search

realthunder / FreeCAD

Link branch FreeCAD
Other
781 stars 45 forks source link

TopoNaming Test #667

Open NothanUmber opened 1 year ago

NothanUmber commented 1 year ago

Did a small experiment where I attached a sketch to a surface which's numbering depends on a parameter. How to reproduce:

This could be easily prevented by using the XY plane with a z-offset for Sketch004 instead of binding it to a surface of the Loft. This was only a test for Topo-stuff.

Used FreeCad LinkDaily 2022.1128 (26244 +5318)

NothanUmber commented 1 year ago

P.S.: When changing num_pipes from 3 to 4 and then back to 3 the links seem to be restored. But when changing from 3 to 2 and then back to 3 the links stay broken.

realthunder commented 1 year ago
  • Open the "Parameters" spreadsheet and change the parameter "num_pipes" from 3 to 4 => The error message "580.833 Document.cpp(4327): Failed to recompute PatternTest_LinkBranch#Sketch004: AttachEngine3D: subshape not found Loft001.?Face7" appears - a face Loft001.?Face7 does not exist anymore

This is an expected behavior. Because the face you attached does not belong to any single pattern. It is generated by combining two patterns. So when you change the pattern count, the original face is gone. There is a similar face, but obviously not the same.

BTW, the way you use patterned profiles causes Loft to produce an invalid shape. You can turn on Split profile option to make it right.

image

realthunder commented 1 year ago

P.S.: When changing num_pipes from 3 to 4 and then back to 3 the links seem to be restored. But when changing from 3 to 2 and then back to 3 the links stay broken.

There is a recent fix of losing track of topo naming change on undo/redo.

NothanUmber commented 1 year ago

Thanks for the feedback - also thanks for the "split profile" hint! Ok, then even with the Topo fix in place one probably shouldn't blindly use any face in sight as a reference for new sketches.

There is a recent fix of losing track of topo naming change on undo/redo.

In this case I didn't use the undo or redo feature but just changed the value back to what it was. Would of course be nice if undo and manual reversion of steps would always lead to the same internal state if possible.